young earth dilemma

Young earth dilemma:
One of my sons(Michael) teaches science in a Mennonite school. One of his brightest students seems to be a young earther. Recently while teaching biology he got into evolution, and found a communication problem. Currently he is teaching geology and running into even more of a problem while talking about rocks(Iowa limestone) that are millions of years old.
Mike is concerned that if he pushes the subject too much the student's parents might take him out of the school(he had been home schooled).
Can he get through to the student such that the conflict does not escalate.
If so, how so?
Curiously, the student did not have a conflict when plate tectonics was introduced.

Does anyone have access to James Hutton's unpublished preface to his Theory of the Earth?
Wherein, he addressed his concerns that the book would likely run into religious criticism?

Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

The best a science teacher or scientist can do is present the mainstream views.

If I were teaching evolution in a context which included some students with religious beliefs contrary to Darwinian explanations, I might try the following.

The fossil record includes series of fossils which might be called the facts of evolution, namely eohippus to modern horse & early primates to modern man. Darwinian evolution is a credible explanation for such related sequences of fossils.

Those who disagree with the Darwinian explanation should be asked to provide an alternative explanation of those facts which is as plausible or more plausible.

Young earth dilemma:
One of my sons(Michael) teaches science in a Mennonite school. One of his brightest students seems to be a young earther. Recently while teaching biology he got into evolution, and found a communication problem. Currently he is teaching geology and running into even more of a problem while talking about rocks(Iowa limestone) that are millions of years old.
Mike is concerned that if he pushes the subject too much the student's parents might take him out of the school(he had been home schooled).
Can he get through to the student such that the conflict does not escalate.
If so, how so?
Curiously, the student did not have a conflict when plate tectonics was introduced.

Does anyone have access to James Hutton's unpublished preface to his Theory of the Earth?
Wherein, he addressed his concerns that the book would likely run into religious criticism?

I suspect the best course is not to labour the age of the Earth or evolution, but to focus on the uncontentious areas of science and get him hooked on those. And if he is OK with things like plate tectonics, then teach that and allow the student to work out for himself (it may take some years) that the whole thing only really hangs together if the Earth is old. When the challenges come, your son will of course have to say that science has a lot of evidence for the age of the Earth, but I think the key thing is not to make a confrontation of it and to try to be understanding that this guy will be wrestling with cognitive dissonance.

The hope has to be that your son can save this student from YEC beliefs, by sowing the seeds of an interest in science. If he were in England then he could be taught in Religious Education class the mainstream Christian interpretations of Genesis etc, which do not conflict with science, but I guess one can't do that in the States, so perhaps best not to go into that.

Several of these c.19th earth scientists seems to have been clergymen. Buckland was one too - Dean of Westminster, no less!

I've seen a bright student handle the issue (with their family) via the concept of "God years".

We have already some examples at hand: kilometers/miles, Centigrade/Farenheit, dog years/people years.

As flawed humans we use "human years", and scientists in particular use them because all humans have them in common - it's easier to do the arithmetic when everyone is using the same units.

There is no implication of capital T "Truth" involved - it's just a scale unit, derived from our small and inadequate human perceptions.

Just a suggestion. Sometimes works.

Click to expand...

Is that not legitimising the view as being scientific? As such I would discourage it from a science class.
At best I would tell the person that the young-earth notion is not a scientific matter, and leave it at that.

science does not try and convince people.
science does not change its language
science just is as it is found.
much like a rock.

choosing to do battle with the childs parental authority boundarys is one of the most important parts school teachers play in the developing minds of children.
Civilisation as we know it would be stuck in a feudal age if it were not for this aspect.

We have an amazing variety of bedrock here in Iowa--from precambrian through cretaceous.
I wonder how the school is on field trips?
Washington county(where the Mennonite school is) has Devonian, Pennsylvanian, Mississippian and Cretaceous bedrock.

In Missouri we have hundreds of feet of limestone. "Limestone is a sedimentary rock, which means it was formed from small particles of rock or stone that have been compacted by pressure. Sedimentary rock is important because it often contains fossils and gives clues about what type of rock was on the Earth long ago. Just like a tree's rings tell a lot about its environment, layers found in sedimentary rock can tell about important changes in the environment."

Public schools shouldn't be in the business of teaching fake facts. Of course, the best thing is to show the evidence of geology. I don't understand what other option is there?

Click to expand...

Nobody is suggesting that. Read the thread. The discussion is about a suitably diplomatic approach, to avoid deterring a potentially talented science student, who has the misfortune to have had a YEC upbringing.

The fat area of the dammed river out in front of my house is called Coralville lake. Coralville is a town south of us.
The "mother of pearl" inner surface of the 200+ million year old bivalves are still shiny --- those things may not have been Rhodes scholars, but they did know how to build something that lasts.
In some road cuts and quarries one may see sedimentary rocks from 3 geological periods.

Old saying among sculptors: "everyone can look but we must learn to see".

There were, at last count, 1,143 people* who were qualified to attend our family reunions. I call them "the Rabbit Clan". Best thing that ever happened to me was moving from the Ozarks to Indiana. Got me away from their institutionalized stupidity. Indiana is no MIT prep school but I managed to get an education despite the inertia of the '60s.

The fat area of the dammed river out in front of my house is called Coralville lake. Coralville is a town south of us.
The "mother of pearl" inner surface of the 200+ million year old bivalves are still shiny --- those things may not have been Rhodes scholars, but they did know how to build something that lasts.
In some road cuts and quarries one may see sedimentary rocks from 3 geological periods.

Old saying among sculptors: "everyone can look but we must learn to see".

Click to expand...

......built from platelets of aragonite (one of the crystal structures of CaCO3), which have dimensions of the same order as the wavelengths of visible light, hence the iridescence. Interestingly however, Wiki says that aragonite is thermodynamically unstable with respect to calcite and therefore tends to covert itself into calcite over timescales of 10-100m yrs.

Coralville has Devonian fossil beds, doesn't it? These would be 350-400m yrs old, but as you mention 200m yr old fossils I presume you are referring to some younger rocks. You mention 200m yrs old, which would put them near the boundary between the Triassic and Jurassic.